Colorado Legal Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
840402702
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3038371313
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$25,311,011
Expenses
$27,718,851
Assets
$20,127,534
Liabilities
$8,130,738

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHEW BACA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MATTHEW BACA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $187,642 total reported compensation
  • KARIN M TROENDLE (DIRECTOR OF ADVOCACY NORTH): $178,734 total reported compensation
  • GAIL RODOSEVICH (DIRECTOR OF PRO BONO SERVICES): $160,196 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide meaningful access to high quality, civil legal services in the pursuit of justice for as many low income persons and members of vulnerable populations throughout Colorado as possible.

What it reported doing in 2025

Colorado legal services (cls) is Colorado's statewide legal aid nonprofit that has served coloradans in poverty for 100 years, guiding through difficult civil legal matters. We represent coloradans who meet income and other requirements for free. Our 12 offices help people facing a variety of legal problems in eight primary areas of work, which include these four core practice areas, as well as four statewide specialty areas. These areas are economic justice ( debt collection, bankruptcy, garnishment, repossession), family law ( divorce, custody and protection orders), housing ( evictions, foreclosures and landlord/ tenant issues) and public benefits ( ss, medicare, medicaid and snap).during 2025, cls closed 8,424 cases in which legal assistance was provided to client. Those households included 10,178 adults, and 6,292 children. In addition, cls held 308 legal education/information events for our client communities. Cls also held 159 outreach events to partner agencies and professional organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.2%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 90.6%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $65.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.5%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.2% of revenue deployed · 90.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $25.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $188K · 33 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.